Do Episodic Games have a Future?

Telltale Games has made episode 1 of the walking dead free on Xbox Live until the 29^th December, no doubt in a bid to get us to by the other four episodes. With great critical acclaim it’s fairly certain season 2 is in the pipeline, but is it a viable move for other developers?

Telltale’s whole business model is based around making episodic games for licensed franchises. Unfortunately, very few of their previous works have been very successful, with nothing even coming close to the Walking Dead series. Other companies also haven’t had much success with episodic games, Sonic 4 only ever released two episodes neither of which were very successful. So why would anyone go for it?

Well firstly Telltale produced Tales of Monkey Island, which was very good so some positives to be gained from there. Also a large benefit of episodic games is that smaller studios don’t need to make a huge big budget blockbuster all in one go which can be very expensive for a company that has a small and not always continuous income. For audiences, each episode is significantly cheaper, sometimes similar to or less than the price of DLC for a ‘normal’ game. This is in a world where short, cheap games are becoming more popular. Smartphones and Steam have had great success selling games for low prices. It is true that gaming may be moving away from a £40 game. For these reasons, episodic games give a better opportunity, arguably, to smaller, independent developers.

Sonic 4 went episodic probably based on production costs because the return was uncertain. Sonic 3 was released back in 1994, back when he and Mario were still king. Sonic’s appeal has diminished in the years after then and so it would have been difficult to tell whether Sonic 4, a continuation form Sonic 3, would have been successful. By making it episodic, Sega didn’t have to pour millions in and could pull funding whenever they wanted.

However, Telltale’s reasons for episodic games are beyond the economic. Telltale combines their use of episodic games with other media franchises, such as the Walking Dead, Law & Order and Wallace & Gromit. These are (mostly) TV series’ and hence the games are formatted like TV series’. If you look at the video game industry, it is largely based on the film industry. Work for months, a year, two even three, then create one product that is pure, concentrated enjoyment in the space of 10-20 hours. Aside from the differing time scales, this is largely how films are made, of course games often have better replay-ability but the film industry makes money later through DVD, blu-ray and licensing to TV. Both have also found later incomes through digital distribution as DLC or through on demand services like LoveFilm or Netflix. Episodic games are more like TV series, the enjoyment is far more concentrated into a smaller time frame and it is crucial the ending hooks the audience into watching or buying the next episode, more so than it is with film. 

It is also crucial then for an episodic game to be released at set intervals, this is easy for TV thanks to a set schedule, but for games it can be harder to meet a schedule. Late Beta testing can sometimes run for longer than expected and often causes delayed releases. Some developers have mastered hitting schedules, the FIFA games by EA are always on time, though often release with countless bugs, some of which are never fixed. Telltale is also well known for hitting its schedules. By hitting a schedule people trust the developer to release the product at that time, hence they can get excited by it, hype builds and more buy the game.

I'm late, I'm late for a very important date, the next episode, my audiences aren't going to wait

Episodic games also allow for stories to remain focused and immersive. Each episode can focus on one part of the story and keep it tight. The greatest feature of the Walking Dead is how it tells its story, it is tight, immersive and hooks you. The same is true for episode 1 and 2 of Half Life 2 (though you could argue that they are DLC rather than an episodic series). The Half Life 2 episodes end on huge cliff hangers making gamers clamour for more (only for Valve then not to deliver). The fact that there was no episode 3 caused anger amongst the community since we could never find out what happened after SPOILER Alex’s dad died. END OF SPOILER. This only emphasies the point about releasing episodes on time. Some argue that Half Life 2 Episode 2 was better than the original Half Life game. The two episodes carry on the story like a TV series that follows on from a film. When writing its stories Telltale apparently works with writers on the TV series allowing for a game that is not just a poor imitation of the programme but a well thought out extension of it.

Episodic games may also invite a new group of people into gaming. Many people don’t play games because they don’t have the time to play an entire standalone title from beginning to end in a short enough time span for the story to remain fresh in your memory. However, to some playing a much shorter game in a month or in two months is much more appealing, you can easily drop in and out and it does not require constant undivided attention, in the same way watching a TV show takes up less time than watching a film.

Episodic games probably do have a future, but they are by no means a competitor to the standard game format yet. For that to happen digital distribution needs to take off (more than it already has done), probably until a large majority of the gaming community use digital downloads, which still is not the case. For many years video games have taken a format similar to films with a big blockbuster and maybe it is time to search for alternatives, after all developers have seen huge success with short games on phones, PSN and XBLA. Maybe the next step is an increase in episodic games where games take the television series model and adapt it. The model has its gains and drawbacks, TV competes well with film, so what’s to say episodic games can’t compete with stand-alone titles? Video gaming is an industry that has only been around for less than 30 years, it is still arguably finding its feet in the world and even the film industry is still changing, so a new format of games taking centre stage, stranger things have happened.

What Really Sells a Console?

The Wii U continues to lead us into the new generation of console gaming. In doing so, it arguably has no competition, though the PS3 and 360 are still selling well. As it develops, it should build momentum and begin to sell as much as and surpass the PS3 and 360. However, it is difficult to say how it will fare against the next iterations of the Xbox and PlayStation, everyone has different opinions as to what really makes a console great (or anything for that matter), hence the fanboy is born. But to normal consumers, what is really is key behind actually becoming the most successful console in a generation.

Hardware

We all think we're as cool as this guy

So let’s start by being idealist. A console is a piece of hardware at the end of the day and people want to buy the best piece of hardware. Problem is, it’s very difficult to decide what is the best. Although the sheer power of the processer and the graphics card is what often convinces people, a set of powerful CPU’s and Graphics cards don’t necessarily relate to a better experience. We all like to think we’re nerds who know an incredible amount about how video games work, so people will go by the stat that they believe best defines the technical quality of a video game. There are so many factors though, each with their own merit, that it is near impossible to decide. For example, to me the PS3 seems more powerful with better graphics, however Xbox games seem to utilise their hardware to an extent where the difference is minimal, and cue fanboy mania. A good example of high power not selling is the Atari Jaguar, it was the first ever 64-bit console, overpowering the SNES and Megadrive, nevertheless its lack of quality third party games was its demise.

Games

Let’s stay idealist and say it’s the games themselves that sell the console. This is one large reason as to why companies spend so much to keep developers loyal and force them to produce exclusive games and content. Simply having the bragging rights to say that your mate can’t play Halo or being returned by the fact that you can’t play Uncharted is enough to make many people jealous. This battle was probably most fierce between Sega and Nintendo in the early 90s when you were either a Sonic or Mario fan (go Sonic!). These were part of the reasons Nintendo gained such a foothold in the industry and also why Sega only really managed to sell the Megadrive at a competitive number. At the end of the day, consoles are made to play games and if the games are not as good on one console, then it makes little sense to buy that console. Hence, games are one of the biggest demises of consoles, countless consoles have been destroyed simply by lack of 3^rd party development, let alone 1^st party exclusives. Just look at the way hardcore gamers got frustrated with the Wii, a huge lack of quality hardcore games meant that Nintendo lost the belief of many fans, despite producing some very good first party content. The flipside is that because of the games on the Wii, it sold phenomenally well amongst casual gamers, Nintendo however employed the same system for the GameCube, which didn’t do nearly as well as the Wii, but this might be more to do with marketing.

Marketing

So onto marketing, one of the largest affecting factors, arguably. As mentioned, this was a huge part of the Wii’s success. The Wii had a very good marketing campaign, it targeted its audience heavily and effectively. It brought in a generation of casual gamers that would’ve never otherwise even have considered games. In case you hadn’t realised, marketers rule the world and anyone who denies they’ve been a victim of marketing is really the biggest victim of us all. Marketing and advertising have a huge influence on our lives, look at many of the big corporations in the world, McDonald's, Starbucks, Coca-Cola and they were all bought and made global by marketing geniuses. All industries need marketing, hence why companies spend so much on it, Hollywood regularly spends more on marketing than it does on its actual film and often doesn’t include marketing in its official budget for a film, just to save their blushes. The Wii triumphed in the way the PS1 and 2 did, they aimed their marketing at a huge market and encouraged new players to take up gaming. The day to day man doesn’t know all facts and figures about a games console and his only way of knowing anything is adverts, so he is persuaded by what advert is the best, simply because he has no other reference points. It seems clear that advert for games consoles work better on those who know less about games and maybe that’s why Microsoft has changed Xbox 360 adverts to focusing on it as an entertainment hub, i.e. focusing it towards the casual market and those who would’ve otherwise not bought a console. However it is this market who are most susceptible to another factor – price.

Price

You'll need a little more than that Luigi...

Money makes the world go round and no one ever seems to have enough of it. Consoles are expensive and people have to consider whether their investment is going to pay back. Logic dictates that a smaller price means a smaller risk and so people will consider less, and vice versa. The average tech geek or super nerd with disposable income will spend a fortune to get the latest gear and often (within reason) won’t really care what they pay for it, the computer parts industry is based on this. So, when the PS3 was released at £425, people were reluctant, those with their hearts set on PS3s didn’t care and found some way to convince themselves that they didn’t care or that £425 was reasonable. But, the average person was reluctant, especially when you could buy a Wii for £180 or a 360 for £270. Hence, the PS3 made many of its sales after the price dropped significantly in the coming months, but by then many had already bought a Wii or Xbox for Christmas and Sony had to play catch-up (for which they still haven’t caught up). The Wii being the cheapest was yet another reason for new, casual gamers to op for it, however the Wii had another trick up its sleeve.

Stocks

When the Wii released, it quickly ran out of stock and people were running around trying to desperately find one, sounds like a disaster, people want to buy, but they can’t. This failure was a huge PR success, news companies, websites, people all reporting and talking about Wii’s being out of stock. The Wii’s name was spreading everywhere and with it, Wii fever. The thought that everyone wants this so there’s none left means that it must be great, otherwise no one would want it. Eventually, there is a huge hype and everyone wants a Wii, reason goes out for a walk to see if any shop has a Wii left. Whether Nintendo put low stocks on purpose is still up for argument (though they probably did), whatever the reason, it’s a new marketing strategy that was pure genius and something the Wii U may try to emulate.

Launch Timing

Although, the Wii U may be going for the strategy which benefited the PS2 and Xbox 360, timing. Both the 360 and PS2 were the first of their generations and both gained greatly for it. The PS2 is still the world’s bestselling console for many of the reasons above. It destroyed the GameCube because it was just better and it beat the original Xbox because it came out before. When the PS2 was released it was this huge jump in technology, a piece everybody wanted, people’s faces now had curves and you could actually recognise footballers on FIFA. Being first means there is no competition and being the generation ahead, you’re better than what’s out there. Technologically, the Xbox is better than the PS2, it is more powerful and doesn’t require those pesky memory cards, not to mention the arsenal of incredible exclusives it had and later Xbox Live. But the PS2 came out first, by the time Microsoft released the Xbox, the race was over and Sony had already stolen the show, everyone had already bought a PS2, all your friends had PS2s, could you really be bothered to go and buy another console, no, not really.

The Little Things

Although, some people say it’s the little things in life that count and when you’ve weighed all the above up, it might be something small that makes the decision for you. It could be that you have to pay for Xbox Live, or that the PS3 doesn’t come with a headset or that the Wii needs a nunchuck to play most games, when there is nothing left to make your decision, it might be the smallest thing. The above are all reasons people have genuinely not opted to buy those consoles even though, paying for Xbox Live gives you a much better service, headsets for PS3 can come very cheap and you usually won’t need more than two nunchucks.

New Technology

How did I think this would be a good idea?

Then again, we all like big new fancy toys with more bells and whistles than a Victorian Locomotive.  Just look at Avatar, lots of high tech fluff, but no substance, yet it’s the biggest grossing Pocahontas remake. The whole point of a new generation is to show off new hardware, to show how technology has advanced to change our gaming experience. We continually want the most immersive experience out there and since generations don’t come too often, we will go for the piece of hardware with the best piece of hardware, we will put our bet on what we think is the future of gaming. This was the Wii’s largest selling point, never before had motion been incorporated into the gaming experience like this before, it was a completely new style that aimed to revolutionise the industry. And it’s not just entire console, Kinect sold incredibly well, despite being awful. We were convinced (mostly through marketing) that these would be the future, that standard pad controllers were over and that motion would be the ultimate revolution in the industry, how has that worked out?

In The End

At the end of the day though, all these factors come down to one big one. The competition - each of these factors only makes a difference if the competition beats you in that criterion, your console could cost a fortune, have awful games and be an awful piece of technology, but if there is no one to compete then you run away with the market. As clever as they can be, as conniving and schemeing as these companies are, the power in the end lies with us, the consumer, because when it all boils down, we are what really sells a console (cheesy, I know).